February LSAT- Modern or "Old" Forum

[BentleyLittle]

There seems to be a general consensus that logic games "change" through generations of adminstrations (the 50s are different from the 60s, etc.). This is also noticeable with early LR as opposed to recent LR.

Should I expect to take a new "modern" LSAT in February similar to ones in the 60s/70s? Will it be a "continuation" of what we've been seeing lately? Or will it be a recycled, undisclosed exam from some random year?

This could presumably alter my prep strategy.

[03152016]

.

[BentleyLittle]

It'll be like any other test. They're not going to just re-use an old one. It is true, however, that February tests may be re-used for tests administered under special conditions (rescheduled exams, for example), and the questions on all tests appear in the experimental of previous tests.

FWIW, I dispelled some myths about the February exam in this thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 6&t=221055

Thanks! I'll check it out.

[manidonetoldya]

The LSAT has been changing significantly over the past 5 or so years (especially the past 1-2). The differences are that the test is easier overall. The Logic Games have become streamlined and are not far off what from what you have encountered if you have prepared properly. The LR, well, seems to be the same throughout; but I've personally been doing better on LR sections in the mid-late 60 PT's. RC could arguably be more difficult than it had once been, but not really. It's just a modernity upgrade if you know what I mean. More and more people are doing worse and thus it's getting easier and easier. Additionally, psychometricians are calculating better ways to help minorities with the Experimental section. Minorities tend to score lower (black to white differential is 10 points), so that means questions that minorities consistently get right will generally be easier than they had been before. LSAC has tactfully figured out how to manipulate the scores insofar as the people they want to do well, do well. So, to your question, don't expect anything different. This is just how the test works and will continue to do so unless they eliminate it.

[BentleyLittle]

Additionally, psychometricians are calculating better ways to help minorities with the Experimental section. Minorities tend to score lower (black to white differential is 10 points), so that means questions that minorities consistently get right will generally be easier than they had been before. LSAC has tactfully figured out how to manipulate the scores insofar as the people they want to do well, do well

Can you expand on this point? Do you have sources or are you extropolating?

[manidonetoldya]

A little bit of both.

http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/i ... 1/iss1/16/

There's more on it elsewhere I just haven't the time to find it all.

[BentleyLittle]

http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/c ... ontext=ilj

Thanks. I found a direct link. Tagging to read later.

[90convoy]

I was just thinking about this because it seems like, at least with LG, that certain question types come in waves. For example I've seen fewer in/out games whereas in PTs 45-50 it seemed as though every section had one.

Another observation is that although a lot of people say that modern RC is harder, it could potential have to do with the addition of the comparative passages. Those tend to be more straightforward because I think it is easier to identify the argument structure which makes understanding the whole passage a little bit easier. In my opinion, the LSAC made the other passages a tiny bit harder to balance that out.